Telecomms Masts

[Deleted User]

Following on from all the publicity in todays papers re: mobile phones, my village has just been notified of an application to erect a 3G mast slap bang in the middle of the most densely populated area, and close to a big school.

Has anyone got any experience of opposing these applications, or any advice to offer?

[Deleted User]

everyone wants to use mobiles, but no-one wants the masts !!

[Deleted User]

Ed,

Well, not in the middle of the village when there are acres and acres of fields in all directions, that's for sure.

Barkles

Have experience of trying to oppose a TETRA mast ( rather more powerful than standard mobile mast) located very close to my school.

Failed but at least I tried.. faced BT at public enquiry and though I won the point, I lost the war.

Planning permission cant be opposed on potential health grounds. The onus is on you to provide categoric proof of the damage ( non existed two years ago when I was looking)rather than them to prove it is safe.

The fact that some schools rent out space on their land to site the masts rather dents any opposition...

cougie

Don't they put some inside church steeples and towers to disguise them ? I think that's probably easier on the eye than in a field.

I don't think the transmitters themselves are as controversial as the phones though ?

lardass

The problem with mobiles and masts is that the phone itself can only send a signal a relatively short distance - hence the fact that masts need to be where people are - town or village. Also, each mast can only handle a relatively small amount of traffic, so the more people using mobiles, the more masts are needed. Witness the network busy signal you get at New Year, at football matches, when your in a queue on the motorway. Not saying I agree with masts being built but we all use mobiles. Cake and eat it spring to mind. A point to note however, is that electricity pylons give off more harmful emissions than mobile phone masts...allegedly!!

Barkles

There is an organisation dedicated to opposing masts. If you want their details, mail me.

Dave The Iron Ex- Spartan

There is an organisation dedicated to building masts !!!! The one I work for, just spent all morning working on a deal for well rather a lot of new masts...


Sorry folks you all want mobiles, you (or at least your kids) all want the new services....... and I want my job !

Barkles

I have no problem with mobile masts, Dave, it was the Tetra stuff I was unhappy with.

the irony was that it was being installed for the emergency services, but the police federation refused to have it near the police station on safety grounds, so they put it next to a nursery.....

Dave The Iron Ex- Spartan

Errr.... We are also the worlds leading supplier of Tetra equipment.....




Thinks keep low profile for a while ( just til my second head vanishes !)

Barkles

Wasnt arguing that it should not be installed.. merely that in a fairly big area of woodland, with hills and stuff,a school nursery wasnt the best place to site it.

Barkles

..was a funny moment in the public enquiry, when the BT solicitor asked if I had any other suggestions for where they could put the mast.

I replied 'I know exectly where you can out it.'

Even the 'judge' saw the funny side.

Dave The Iron Ex- Spartan

I understood your point, there is unfortunately rather alot of work needing to be done to site a mast / base station, it isn't quite as simple as finding a bit of un-used land...


You need :-

a) clear line of sight for the system to use
b) facilities on site to run the base station
Power, water etc
c) Connection to the backbone / backhaul network to link all the base stations together
d) loads more ......



We run a massive "planning dept" who work out the most suitable locations for siting these things.... ( including the one on my office roof mobile & tetra )

Barkles

Fair point mate, but if the cop shop aint good enough on safety grounds.....

Dave The Iron Ex- Spartan

The joke round our office was "Would we have noticed if it had caused mental problems in the Cops"....


Oh don't tell Imelda that one ! (She operates Tetra !)

Barkles

LOL!!!

[Deleted User]

DTS,

What you're saying is... it's a money thing.

The majority of the reasons for NOT putting a mast in a field relate to the costs of providing power/cabling/etc. to the site.

So the question is, who should bear the costs? The Company who is installing the mast (to make money... don't give me the "to provide a service cr@p"), or the local resident who, amongst other things (and notwithstanding the health question which is entirely un-resolved), will experience a significant drop is house value.

[Deleted User]

As Dave says, it's not as simple as putting masts where there's a bit of space. Firstly - it's a radio signal, so wooded areas effectively block and signal. Secondly - you have to be able to reach your customers.

And if you want to be able to use your phones....

We had a case a few years ago when centerparcs asked us if we could get some service into one of their parks, as they had none. When we tried to install a base station, they wouldn't let us. They still have no service, but fail to understand why we can't resolve it.

Womble

Obviously all the parents who object to mobile masts near schools etc don't buy mobiles for their children. Do they.

Dave The Iron Ex- Spartan

Who should bear the costs Rocks ?

You do !!!!!!

the cost of installing a base station is not bourne by the company operating it... They pass it straight on to the subscribers using the service.


And lots of base stations are in fields, try counting them on your way up a motorway, the first thing that must be satisfied in siting a base station is the coverage it will have, the better the coverage the more subscribers can use it, therefore the more revenue you can extract from it !!!

Which is why lots of base stations ARE in fields beside motorways, cos all the rep mobiles generate enough income per site to justify the cost of building the site

[Deleted User]

Rocks

Money isn't the issue - you have to be able to get the signal to the users. Radio only travels so far. The more buildings, trees, hills etc there are, the less distance it will travel. So you need to put the base station where the customers are.

And if you saw the amount of complaints that mobile operators get because people can't get a signal in their village/house, and the fact that most of the money making stations have already been built, you have to question why the operators are putting it there - could it be that it's been requested by a local resident??? The cost of installing and maintaining the average base station in the average village takes mobile operators 10 - 15 years to start making a profit on it.

[Deleted User]

Anyway, I wasn't looking to debate the rights and wrongs of it all... just wondered if anyone had any experience/advice to offer.

Thanks for your feedback - esp. Barkles - is the site you refer to mastsanity.org?

I'll pm you in case there is anything else you can offer anecdotally.

Barkles

Yes, I believe it is.

[Deleted User]

DTS - you're right, I bear the cost of a mobile phone. But as a consumer I have choices - I can shop around, I can choose not to have a mobile phone if I so wish.

As a resident of my village, I have not chosen to have this mast thrust upon me, and I have not CHOSEN to have 20% of the value wiped off my house.

LozF - "Money isn't the issue".... oh, ok, I didn't realize "3" had recently changed status from a plc to a registered charity..... OF COURSE IT'S ABOUT BL00DY MONEY! I attended a 2 hour meeting on this subject yesterday with several very well informed people, many of whom work in the telecomms industry, who confirmed there were dozens of othere suitable sites from a positional perspective. It's just that the chosen site has the required infrastructure in situ and will therefore be the cheapest to implement.

Dave The Iron Ex- Spartan

The biggest proplem you have in trying to oppose a site, is the fact the operating company will have spent months preparing a business case, for approval by senior management / board level... That case will have demonstrated that the operator can make money from the site....... So it won't pass up on the chance to make cash...


I assume LozF you work for an operator ? I'm visiting obe of the biggest net week in Newbury

[Deleted User]

DTS, yes, we've been told that this is a marathon not a sprint (see - I knew I could work a running theme into the thread somehow), and that even if we win the initial committee round, it will go to appeal and that is when the operators big guns will come out.

[Deleted User]

There probably is a lot more of a case against high voltage power lines on health grounds. But that dosen't stop peeps building houses underneath the grid.

There are so many wireless systems going in these days there probably isn't much turning back unless someone comes up with conclusive evidence that we're all gonna die because of it.

Most people have a mobile these days, and will no doubt benefit from the emergency services adopting the TETRA technology. It always comes down to the old 'not on my doorstep' argument.

Just don't go in Starbucks - its positively humming with deadly waves.

Dave The Iron Ex- Spartan

So it isn't a new mast then, They are just adding a 3G antenna onto an existing 2G base station....

In that case you might as well save your breath, You have no chance of winning.... For the very reasons you said, the infrastructure is already there. I know form the work I'm doing at the moment, we are basing all our price calculations on using existing sites, it dosn't make any economical sense to build a second site ( you would still need the 3G base station for existing services) The operators business case will support that, and the reasons why the 2G mast was so sited, infrastructure, coverage will still appy to a 3G.

[Deleted User]

so rocks, is it a safety issue or the 20% wiped off the value of your house thats the concern ?

[Deleted User]

DTS - no, it's a new mast (not sure where I implied there was an existing base station).

Ed. I object to this on several grounds.

1. Health Risk
2. Unsightly and inappropriate for a residential village setting
3. The knock-on effect of the above factors on my property value.

The sad fact is, I am not allowed to formally object (as per the council regulations) on the basis of points 1 & 3, and can therefore only focus my objections around point 2.

Dave The Iron Ex- Spartan

It was your comment about having the required infrastructure already in place, also the site of a 2G mast is likely ( although not always) the most likely place for a 3G mast

Like I said you might as well save your breath !!! With the network planning teams of companies like the one I work for, and a mobile operator with a massive planning team to construct a business case, the little guy ............


'Fraid you might as well accept the fact mobiles are hear to stay !!!

Anyone started a campaign to stop WiFi transmissions ? Mircowave backhaul transmission ? Nope didn't think so